Chandradhan Sharma v. The State Of Bihar Through Mr. Anjani Kumar Singh, The Chief Secretary, State Of Bihar, Patna And O

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.696 of 2017 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 8319 of 2016 ====================================================== Chandradhan Sharma, Son of late Shoe Ratan Sharma, Resident of village - Ghai, P.S. Nasriganj, District - Rohtas ( Sasaram). .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through Mr. Anjani Kumar Singh, the Chief Secretary, State of Bihar, Patna.

2. Aamir Subhani, Son of name not known to the Petitioner, the Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Bihar, Patna.

3. P.K. Thakur, Son of not known to the Petitioner, the Director General of Police, Government of Bihar, Patna.

4. Vinay Kumar, Son of not known to the Petitioner, the Inspector General of Police, Crime Investigation Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

5. Binod Kumar Chaudhary, Son of not known to the Petitioner, the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Government of Bihar, Patna.

6. Sanjay Kumar, Son of not known to the Petitioner, the Superintendent of Police (C), Government of Bihar, Patna.

.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nand Lal Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Manish Kumar, Adv.

For the Respondent/s : Mr. Suman Kumar Jha, AC to AAG- 3 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER 07-02-2018 Heard Mr. Nand Lal Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Suman Kumar Jha, learned Assisting Counsel to Additional Advocate General No.3 for the State.

The writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the respondents to calculate the post-retiral benefit of the petitioner and to make payment of the same within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of the order. The

Patna High Court MJC No.696 of 2017 (3) dt.07-02-2018 petitioner has also filed a supplementary affidavit admitting certain payment being made.

A show cause is also filed on behalf of the opposite party nos.3 to 6 giving the details of the payment which does not satisfy the petitioner as according to him, the dues has not been properly calculated and not in its entirety.

In the nature of the order that was passed on the writ petition the payment towards the post-retiral benefits have been made to the petitioner and in case it does not satisfy him then the challenge to such is in an appropriate proceeding before the appropriate forum but certainly a case for contempt is not made out. Liberty is thus granted to the petitioner to point out the infirmities in the calculation of dues so paid to the petitioner before an appropriate forum by filing an appropriate application. For the present the contempt application is disposed of with the liberty aforementioned.

(Jyoti Saran, J) SKPathak/- U